@brn123 yeah. so 2 days is just a warning I guess? if they continue their current plans people may leave for good I guess.
Might as well delete your account now. Reddit Inc. won't learn, they only care about their IPO, and making it profitable in the short term. The likelyhood of them going "Ok, we hear you and from now on we'll focus on our users' needs instead of quick profits" at this point is close to zero.
The way I see it, the function of this protest is to make a warning example of Reddit, so that other companies can see what happens when you bite the hand that feeds you.
Is there any chance that we as users can destroy their value before they go public? I don't mind private businesses, but the moment they go public, I'm very happy to boycot them, especially if they're online social networks and similar businesses. Them going public always means destroying their communities and screwing over their users.
[can] we as users can destroy their value [...]?
I'd want to say yes, but I think it depends on how you were using reddit in the first place.
90-9-1-rule states that in a collaborative website, 90% of the participants of a community only consume content, 9% of the participants change or update content, and 1% of the participants add content.
If the content creators and participants act together, with at least a semi-unified front, I believe there's potential for lots of damage. Creators have their audiences as leverage. Mods can stop doing unpaid work for reddit and open the spam floodgates. Participants can participate on other platforms, which in turn drives lurker traffic further from reddit. If we could get a larger movement going on, reddit would eventually wither away.
Digg lost half of it's userbase in three months due to redesigns and venture capital meddling. I'm not sure if reddit's API changes are a similarily powerful motivator for the masses by themselves. In reddit's case, I think it would require the majority of content creators and participators to move the OC elsewhere.
@axo10tl
Indeed. But regardless I think decentralized platforms are the way to go. I wish that we will soon forget about any centralised platform and only use decentralized ones.
It's ironic, because the WWW always was decentralized by nature. Websites were people's social media profiles and decentralized platforms. Email was the decentralized instant messenger. But then business realized that it would be more profitable to sell ads if they can target them, and targeting only works well when the users stay on your site, and not someone else's.
I can't blame the people for flocking into these walled gardens. They made a lot of sense in the beginning. Instead of having to learn how to code (or use MS FrontPage, and figure out wtf is an FTP), you could just click a button to insert your photo on "your" profile page, change the texts, add some links... Ease-of-use is a major driving force when it comes to mass-adoption of technology. Companies do this well, because they recognize this issue, but the FOSS community tends to be too homogenous and tech-minded to execute it as well as commercial players do, because they operate largely on a volunteer-basis, and aren't exactly easily approachable by folks who aren't tech-minded.
But now we're getting to a point where all this has gone a full circle. The overwhelming majority of websites have evolved to have horrendous UX, because money and the marketing dept. speaks louder than users' needs. And now the users are slowly beginning to realize that these companies don't serve their interest like they did 10-20 years ago.
With some luck, the open, decentralized models will gain more traction again, as long as the people making the software manage to attract UX-people and designers.
@axo10tl Well said. The problem with WWW was that the decentralization part didn't evolve with time. We needed new protocols to approach the modern user. We have the protocols now then UX has to catch up a bit but I'm sure it will. And another thing as always - users have to get used to new ways of doing things.
@brn123 yeah. so 2 days is just a warning I guess? if they continue their current plans people may leave for good I guess.
Might as well delete your account now. Reddit Inc. won't learn, they only care about their IPO, and making it profitable in the short term. The likelyhood of them going "Ok, we hear you and from now on we'll focus on our users' needs instead of quick profits" at this point is close to zero.
The way I see it, the function of this protest is to make a warning example of Reddit, so that other companies can see what happens when you bite the hand that feeds you.
Is there any chance that we as users can destroy their value before they go public? I don't mind private businesses, but the moment they go public, I'm very happy to boycot them, especially if they're online social networks and similar businesses. Them going public always means destroying their communities and screwing over their users.
I'd want to say yes, but I think it depends on how you were using reddit in the first place.
If the content creators and participants act together, with at least a semi-unified front, I believe there's potential for lots of damage. Creators have their audiences as leverage. Mods can stop doing unpaid work for reddit and open the spam floodgates. Participants can participate on other platforms, which in turn drives lurker traffic further from reddit. If we could get a larger movement going on, reddit would eventually wither away.
Digg lost half of it's userbase in three months due to redesigns and venture capital meddling. I'm not sure if reddit's API changes are a similarily powerful motivator for the masses by themselves. In reddit's case, I think it would require the majority of content creators and participators to move the OC elsewhere.
@axo10tl
Indeed. But regardless I think decentralized platforms are the way to go. I wish that we will soon forget about any centralised platform and only use decentralized ones.
It's ironic, because the WWW always was decentralized by nature. Websites were people's social media profiles and decentralized platforms. Email was the decentralized instant messenger. But then business realized that it would be more profitable to sell ads if they can target them, and targeting only works well when the users stay on your site, and not someone else's.
I can't blame the people for flocking into these walled gardens. They made a lot of sense in the beginning. Instead of having to learn how to code (or use MS FrontPage, and figure out wtf is an FTP), you could just click a button to insert your photo on "your" profile page, change the texts, add some links... Ease-of-use is a major driving force when it comes to mass-adoption of technology. Companies do this well, because they recognize this issue, but the FOSS community tends to be too homogenous and tech-minded to execute it as well as commercial players do, because they operate largely on a volunteer-basis, and aren't exactly easily approachable by folks who aren't tech-minded.
But now we're getting to a point where all this has gone a full circle. The overwhelming majority of websites have evolved to have horrendous UX, because money and the marketing dept. speaks louder than users' needs. And now the users are slowly beginning to realize that these companies don't serve their interest like they did 10-20 years ago.
With some luck, the open, decentralized models will gain more traction again, as long as the people making the software manage to attract UX-people and designers.
@axo10tl Well said. The problem with WWW was that the decentralization part didn't evolve with time. We needed new protocols to approach the modern user. We have the protocols now then UX has to catch up a bit but I'm sure it will. And another thing as always - users have to get used to new ways of doing things.